Politics

Following the signing of a new executive order by California Governor Jerry Brown, the official target for all-electric vehicle sales in the state is now 5 million electric cars on California’s roads by 2030.

Over at CleanTechnica, Steve Hanley reports more details: “To reach the goal, California will spend $2.5 billion between now and 2025 to install more charging stations and hydrogen fueling stations throughout the state. It will also beef up its incentives and rebate programs for people who buy zero emissions cars. Right now, there are about 350,000 zero-emissions vehicles on the road in California. Increasing the number 15 fold in 12 years will be a daunting task.

“The plan calls for expanding the number of EV charging stations in the state from 14,000 today to 250,000. Fast charging stations will increase from 1,500 to 10,000 and hydrogen refueling stations will jump from 31 today to 200. Some of the cost of expanding the charging infrastructure will be paid for money Volkswagen has agreed to pay to settle claims connected to its diesel cheating scandal. Proceeds from California’s cap & trade carbon emissions will also pay part of the cost.”

“California, joined by nearly a dozen other states, could seek to enforce existing emissions rules, even if the Trump administration softens the federal 2022-2025 requirements,” Reuters adds. “Automakers want the White House and California to reach agreement because a legal battle over the rules could result in lengthy uncertainty for the industry. They want changes to address lower gasoline prices and a shift in US consumer preferences to larger, less fuel-efficient vehicles.”

While this news is of course worth taking consideration of, it remains to be seen what it will amount to in practice. One thing that is certain, however, is that this move will definitely upset the Trump base and his Administration’s EPA!

Earlier this week, the Trump Administration announced plans to impose a 30% protectionist tariff on imported solar cells and modules in response to a Section 201 trade case filed by Suniva and SolarWorld back in April of 2017. Lots of people- especially the writers over at our sister site, Cleantechnica– seem super worried about the impact this move will have on the US solar industry, saying it could cost as many as 23,000 American jobs this year, alone. You know who doesn’t seem worried about the new tariffs, though? Tesla CEO Elon Musk.

That’s because Tesla is slowly building a massive solar panel factory in South Buffalo, New York in a joint venture deal with Panasonic. For now, they’ll be impacted by the tariffs along with everyone else- but that could change. Panasonic, for example, knows how to make solar cells and, as an American manufacturer, they’d be unaffected by the tariffs. If they do move production to one of the Gigafactories, they’ll get a huge competitive advantage (in the US, at least). It’s no surprise, then, that Tesla executives have largely shrugged their shoulders at the new Trump tariff.

If they do get around to producing solar panels in the US, they’ll probably go from shrugging their shoulders to high-fiving each other in the streets. That’ll be fun.

The tariffs, targeted mainly toward manufacturers in China and the Far East, will start at 30 percent and decline to 15 percent over a four-year period. That sounds harsh, but the first 2.5 gigawatts of imported solar cells are excluded from the tariff each year- and that’s not nothing. Costs will rise, though, with the price of residential rooftop systems expected to rise by about 4 percent, according to analysts at ClearView Energy Partners.

Sharp-eyed observers will note that 4% is barely more than the pace of inflation, however, which seems to indicate- to me, at least- that this is not the doomsday scenario many in the green press are predicting. I’ve been wrong before, though. What do you guys think?

Will the Trump tariffs force the industry into a decline, giving coal a second wind? Or, is this all just a protectionist posturing to cater to Trump’s base that will, ultimately, not amount to anything substantial? Head to the comments section at the bottom of the page and let us know.

You know who else noticed that? The Sierra Club- and they’ve produced a well-executed attack ad on Ford’s attempts to roll back the upcoming CAFE fuel economy standards in order to keep selling low-tech, high-margin pickups like the F250 SuperDuty shown, above. A segment that hasn’t seen the same kind of fuel economy and efficiency gains that other segments have in recent years. You can check that claim against this graph from Green Car Reports, below.

Granted, trucks like the Ford F150 and Chevy Silverado certainly have their uses. Most of the ones I see on the drive between Chicago and Cleveland seem to haul around insecurities and sailboat fuel, though, so I’ll be siding with the (admittedly, flawed) Sierra Club stance on this one.

Ford: Don’t Rollback the Clean Car Standards

In order to keep our air clean and our climate safe, we need to put vehicle greenhouse gas emission and fuel economy standards (clean car standards), in the fast lane, but Ford and Donald Trump are attempting to rollback vital climate and consumer protections. Transportation is the single largest and fastest growing source of emissions in the U.S. Our cars and pickup trucks account for 47 percent of oil used in the United States and nearly one third of our greenhouse gas emissions.

While Ford, Volkswagen, and other major automakers stood by President Obama as he announced the standards five years ago, they’re now trying to roll back our single biggest defense against carbon pollution.

Ford may tout its commitments to sustainability and its investments in clean transportation, but behind closed doors, the auto company is lobbying the Trump administration to keep us locked into a dirty transportation system, worsening dangerous climate change and hastening its impacts. Joining Ford is scandal ridden Volkswagen. While publicly, Volkswagen is claiming to shift its focus to clean transportation and away from diesel gate, its diesel emissions scandal that pumped 20 coal plant’s worth of dangerous smog into our communities, behind the scenes the disgraced company is maneuvering with Trump and Ford to pump even more pollution into our communities, this time in the form of greenhouse gas emissions.

As soon as Trump took office, Ford and Volkswagen started going back on their word, calling on Trump and Pruitt to put the clean car standards in reverse. Earlier this year, Pruitt held a series of closed-door meetings with auto industry executives and lobbyists. A few months later, he announced that EPA would reopen and expand the scope of a review of the clean cars standards, with the likely intention of rolling them back. Duplicating the midterm review of carbon pollution standards is a waste of taxpayer money and a blatant attempt by the administration to rig the system for corporate polluters at the expense of hard-working American families.

A rollback might be what the auto industry lobbyists in Washington want, but it’s not what American families want. would be a catastrophe for American families – pumping a year’s worth of climate pollution from 150 coal fired power plants into our communities.A Natural Resources Defense Council poll found that 95 percent of Americans want automakers to continue to improve fuel economy, and 79 percent want the government to increase standards. This will further contribute to climate change, which can worsen symptoms for the 24 million Americans – including 6.3 million children – who suffer from asthma.

Surveys show that Americans in auto industry heavy states like Michigan, Ohio and Indiana want cleaner cars. If Ford and Volkswagen are successful and Trump rolls back fuel efficiency standards, not only are Ford and Trump going against the wants of the American people, but they’re putting our health and safety at risk.

We need to strengthen cleaner car standards, not roll them back, to ensure clean air and a healthy climate for our families while creating more high-paying jobs for the next great generation. Tell ford to support strong clean car standards.

Green legislation continues to be on the minds of lawmakers in state legislatures across the US, as hundreds of bills relating to clean energy have been proposed over the last year. The final tax bill President Trump signed in December contained several tax incentives for renewable energy, including the $7,500 electric vehicle tax credit. Of course, countries around the world have much more appealing EV subsidies than the US as part of goals of zero auto emissions.

According to the Department of Energy, 3.38 million Americans were employed in the clean energy sector, which is 10% more than the 2.99 million employed in fossil fuels. A confluence of agencies and initiatives are tackling green legislation for transportation and other energy sectors, whether the Trump administration admits the need or not. So this week on the “Gas2 Week in Review,” we look at some of those efforts and the consequences they’re likely to have over the next few years on our transportation and energy consumption.

US Cities Sue Major Fossil Fuel Industrial Polluters

New York City, which is the largest US city, is suing BP, Chevron, ConocoPhillips, Exxon Mobil, and Royal Dutch Shell, arguing that these companies are directly responsible for climate change as the world’s largest industrial polluters. The lawsuit claims, additionally, that these companies lead public relations strategy for the entire fossil fuel industry in downplaying the risks of climate change and promoting fossil fuel use despite the risks. “This lawsuit is based on the claim that a corporation that makes a product causing severe harm when used exactly as intended should shoulder the costs of abating that harm,” the city said in the complaint. Several California municipalities — San Francisco, Oakland, San Mateo, Imperial Beach, and Marin — previously filed suits against the oil industry over the environmental impact of fossil fuels.

If you’re like me, you’re probably fascinated by weird, offbeat vehicles like the Twike (above). If you’re not familiar with it, the Twike is a lightweight, electric, pedal-assisted velomobile. That means you pedal it, like a bike, but there’s an electric motor in there to help you out- but it’s not cheap. Unless you’re in Sweden, that is, because Sweden’s version of the EPA just announced a tax rebate equal to 25% of the purchase price of an electric bicycle, tricycle, or velomo.

Yeah, that’s awesome.

Our good friend and longtime Gas 2 contributor/editor, Steve Hanley, recently covered Sweden’s new program over at our sister site, Cleantechnica. I’ve included his take- which was suspiciously Twike-free- below. Check it out, then let us know if you’d like to see the US introduce a similar plan to promote light EVs like the Twike, Renault Twizy, or the new Ford OjO in the comments section at the bottom of the page. Enjoy!

25% Off Electric Bicycles and Light EVs

Elon Musk likes to start at the top and work down. In Sweden, when it comes to EV incentives, the government is starting at the bottom and working its way up. According to Norwegian news source Elbil, it is now offering a rebate equal to 25% of the purchase price of an electric bicycle, tricycle, or quadricycle. The Swedish rebate program will not apply to self-balancing devices like Segways or hoverboards, but the article in Elbil suggests the Renault Twizy may be eligible. In some cases, an electric wheelchair or hand-operated bicycle may qualify for the incentive. The total amount of money available is limited to 350 million krona annually — about $12 million.

Any Swedish citizen who purchased a qualifying vehicle after September 20, 2017, is eligible. Payments are managed by the Swedish Environmental Protection Agency and will begin after February 1 of next year. Unlike some countries where greed is a national pastime, Swedish authorities will monitor the market to make certain manufacturers don’t automatically mark up the price of their products to include the amount of the rebate. “Job-killing regulation” and “nanny-state socialism” at work, folks.

Sales of electric bicycles and similar vehicles are exploding in Scandinavia. Last year, about 67,000 electric bicycles were sold in Sweden and another 36,000 were sold in Norway. “Research shows that electric bikes replace cars,” says Karolina Skog, Sweden’s Minister of Environment. “Now there is a good selection of bicycles in place and the market has begun to evolve.”

She believes there will be more investment in infrastructure when more people begin using electric bicycles. Norway has already committed $1 billion to building new bike paths so people can commute to and from work safely and conveniently. A recent survey of Norwegian bicycle riders conducted by the Electric Vehicle Association finds that price is the main sticking point for people considering the purchase of an electric bicycle. Also important is more secure parking for bicycles in cities, where stolen bikes are a major problem.

California’s Air Resource Board, or, “CARB”, has been driving automotive policy for decades. CARB has also been a driving force in the mainstream adoption of hybrid and electric vehicles, too, by forcing manufacturers to offer EVs in order to sell more profitable trucks and SUVs in the prosperous state. That kind of regulation over what a company can and can’t sell doesn’t sit well with our current administration, however, and they’re pushing for laws that will maintain one single set of national requirements for all automakers.

If the Trump administration is successful in implementing that single, federal-level law over the states, it will not only go against one of the most closely-held tenets of the Republican party (states’ rights v. federal rights), it will also determine the fate of vehicle emissions rules for the foreseeable future. And, like, not in an awesome way.

A December 15th meeting held in California included William Wehrum, head of the Environmental Protection Agency’s Office of Air and Radiation, National Highway Traffic Safety Administration deputy chief Heidi King, and Mike Catanzaro, a senior White House aide on environment and energy issues, a spokesman for CARB confirmed on Monday. The group wants California to change its rules to address (currently) lower gas prices and what they are calling “a shift in US consumer preferences” to larger, less fuel-efficient vehicles. Larger, less fuel-efficient, lower-tech vehicles that, it should be noted, are the most profitable segment for US automakers.

Here’s hoping the people California kick Trump in the dick hold their ground and keep driving electric vehicle innovation for years to come, regardless of what kind of cash grab the EPA and some major US automakers are hoping for.

What about you guys? Are you hoping California’s CARB is successful in holding back the Trump EPA? Do you want to get banned from posting comments on Gas 2? Put on your flame suits and head to the bottom of the page- let’s see what happens!

An Internal Combustion Engine Ban Will Happen

Mary Nichols, head of the powerful California Air Resources Board, said last fall that she gets “love notes” frequently from Governor Jerry Brown asking why the state is not aggressively following the lead of China and the other nations. Brown is an ardent proponent of the Paris climate accords and has pledged that his state will meet or exceed the goals set by those agreements despite the backwards-looking approach adopted by federal officials in the Trump maladministration. (Good one! -Ed.)

At present, even though more zero-emissions cars are sold in California than any other state, they still account for only 1.9% of new car sales there. There are 300,000 electric cars in California at the moment, so getting to 100% electric in the next 22 years is an ambitious goal. Whether it can be achieved will depend a lot on lower battery prices and increases in EV charging infrastructure, especially for the millions of apartment and condo dwellers in the state (in any state, really) who, currently, are unable to recharge their vehicles overnight at home.

The push for zero-emissions vehicles will set up what could be a cataclysmic confrontation with federal officials. California currently enjoys an exemption from EPA rules that permits it to impose higher emissions standards than those in the other 49 states. The Trump Administration’s EPA, under the incompetent guidance of Scott Pruitt, could revoke that exception, a move that would provoke a legal challenge from California which will claim it has the legal right to protect the health and welfare of its citizens even if others are content to see their residents suffer shorter, less healthy lives in order to satisfy the insatiable greed of the fossil fuel industry.

If you’ve been looking for a last-minute gift idea for the paintball enthusiast in your life, how about something way over the top? I present, for your consideration, this fully operational 1958 Daimler Ferret Armored Personnel Carrier … that’s been converted to fire paintballs.

I know, I know- this is a green car site and there is nothing environmentally friendly in choosing an APC to get around a paintball field over, say, an off-road Motoped or a Realtree camo mountain bike that you pedal yourself. I hear you, but let’s call this an example of extreme re-use and call it better than building a fresh paint ball tank out of new raw materials. Which is, in fact, also a real thing that you can buy.

The paint’s green, too, which is nice.

For the moment, this paintball APC is a one-off built by “an eccentric Brit” with too much enough time and money on his hands. It’s probably fair to say, however, that making the right offer could get this little beastie delivered just in time to surprise your favorite paintballer for Christmas. On a more realistic note, this is just an awesome build, and you can learn more about it by checking out the photo gallery, below, or heading over to the original article at Silodrome, which includes a brief history of the Daimler Ferret, and even more kicka** PC pictures. Enjoy!

1958 Daimler Ferret Paintball Tank

The Republican tax bill that was rushed through both houses of Congress this week has been called worse things than a scam. That’s to be expected of a bill that guts health coverage for the working class while it reduces taxes on corporations and the very wealthiest Americans. One unexpected side effect of the bill, however, is that the electric vehicle tax credit has survived!

The final version of the Senate tax bill, reportedly, doesn’t include any language that would repeal the existing credits for EVs. In a statement released by the Electric Drive Transportation Association President, Genevieve Cullen said, “We are extremely pleased that members of the conference left in place the consumer credit for plug-in electric vehicles with the agreement for H.R. 1. This credit supports innovation and job creation while helping drivers access advanced vehicle technology. Keeping the plug-in vehicle credit in place is the right policy for consumers and for the nation. We appreciate the conferees’ support and will continue to work with Congress to advance US competitiveness through electric mobility.”

Maybe I’m getting jaded in my old middle age, but I think the survival of the tax credit just means rich guys want to keep buying $100,000+ Tesla sedans and passing the bill on to the middle class. Maybe I’m wrong- or, maybe, they want to find a way to reduce their operating costs and pass the buck on that, too!

Canadian province Ontario offers a Green Commercial Vehicle Program that gives various tax credit incentives to companies buying fuel-saving, eco-friendly vehicles. Now, the province will offer a C$75,000 tax rebate to companies who purchase one of the new generation of electric trucks from Tesla (clickbait!), BYD, Cummins, or Volvo.

For those of you keeping score, that means the Canadian government will pick up nearly 60% of the tab for anyone who wants to buy one of the brand-new Tesla EVs. That’s a tremendous offer, but one that may not last long- the Program will fund just C$12 million in rebates for the fiscal year ending on March 31, 2018.

“Although there is no limit on the number of alternative fuel commercial motor vehicles or fuel saving devices that an applicant may apply for,” said a spokesperson for the Canadian Ministry of Transport, in an interview with AGN. “Payment of incentives will be subject to the availability of funds and GCVP policy objectives, which may change over time.”

The tax credit rebate is intended help achieve Ontario’s target in cutting greenhouse gas pollution- and companies like food retailer Loblaw and big box brand Walmart are sure to be taking advantage of the subsidy incentives, soon. The province has set a goal to reach carbon levels 15 percent below 1990 levels by 2020, 37 percent below 1990 levels by 2030, and 80 percent below by 2050.

Norway is not a member of the European Union, but it is one of the founding nations of the European Free Trade Association (EFTA) and is part of the European Economic Area (EEA). That makes it a kissing cousin to the EU and subject to many of its economic policies. Over the past decade, Norway has surged ahead of other countries when it comes to electric car adoption largely because those vehicles are exempt from paying the value added tax that applies to conventional vehicles.

The VAT can add thousands if not tens of thousands of dollars to the price of a new car in Norway. The exemption means electric and plug-in hybrid cars cost the same or sometimes less to purchase than a traditional diesel or gasoline powered car. But it is set to expire at the end of this year and Norway needs permission from ESA for it to continue, going forward.

From its labor rights issues to its driver protection issues to the allegations of rampant and systemic sexism in its highest ranks, we’ve certainly covered our fair share of Uber’s lows. This past week, however, the new, Kalanick-free Uber reached a new high. Maybe not a business high, mind, but certainly a moral high- when it banned racist Twitter troll Laura Loomer for her hateful, Islamophobic, and un-American tweets following last week’s terror attack in New York.

This Horrible Tweet Got Laura Loomer Banned

To her “credit”, Loomer is really good at pandering to her base of mouth-breathing, neo-Nazi cousinf***ers the lowest common denominator. To drive her/their awfulness home, she even went so far as to suggest the creation of a non-Islamic ride sharing service- a tweet that was promptly liked several hundred times at the time of this writing.

And, lest you think I’m exaggerating, here it is …

… so, yeah. I would say Uber is starting to head in the right direction. At least a little bit in the right direction, anyway, since you can never really celebrate well-deserved come-uppances on people like Laura up there, enough. You know?

Or, maybe you don’t know! Maybe you think I’m the one who’s full of it and you fully support Loomer. If that’s the case, let us know in the comments section at the bottom of the page. I promise you’ll only get banned from Gas 2, and not from Uber (probably). Enjoy!

The Republican Party is desperate to find ways to make rich people richer. It’s what they do. Among the many proposals contained in its latest tax plan is one that would end the $7,500 federal electric car tax credit program. The current policy applies to the first 200,000 electric vehicles produced by each manufacturer. After that, the credit begins to phase out. At present, Tesla and General Motors are closest to 200,000 car limit.

Part of the reason to end the incentive is to pay lip service to the oft repeated Republican mantra that government should not pick winners and losers in the marketplace. In theory, the government didn’t pay the Wright Brothers to create the airplane which led to the airline industry so why should it do so for other industries? If people have a new idea, let them test it in the crucible of the free market. If it succeeds, great. A new industry is born, jobs are created and society benefits. If it fails, someone loses a ton of money but c’est la vie. Time to move on.

Paris is known for taking progressive measures to fight climate change. In December of 2015, delegates from every nation gathered in the City of Light to create the historic COP21 climate accords. But in March of this year, the city suffered through a period of intense smog, during which the air over the city was dirtier than the air over Beijing and blotted out the view of the Eiffel Tower. Much of that smog was attributable to the exhaust emissions from conventional cars.

Photo Credit: The Guardian

In response, the city of Paris put aggressive new procedures in place to limit the number of cars powered by internal combustion engines on its streets. It has banned cars more than 20 years old, which have rudimentary pollution controls, from entering the city and instituted a plan that prohibited cars with license plates ending in even or odd numbers on alternating days. It also converted streets that used to run along the banks of the Seine into pedestrian walkways and bike paths.

October 1 was proclaimed “a day without cars,” a move designed to make Paris “less polluted, more pleasant and more peaceful.” Nitrogen dioxide levels dropped 25 percent, and noise levels dropped an average of 20 percent. On the Champs-Élysées — one of the world’s busiest thoroughfares — noise levels dropped by 54 percent.

“Sensitizing residents to the need to modify their behavior towards the car was part of the objectives of this day,” the mayor’s office said in a statement, adding that it was also meant to be a symbol “that cities can and must invent concrete solutions to fight air pollution caused by traffic.”

Now the mayor of Paris has announced a plan that seeks to remove all gasoline and diesel powered vehicles from its streets by 2030. The plan is not a ban. Instead it involves a series of investments and incentives designed to encourage citizens to leave their old fossil fuel burning vehicles behind and switch to walking, bicycling, and using electric cars. The objective is to make Paris a carbon neutral city by 2050.

“We are seeing a revolution in terms of mobility and on the issue of climate,” Christophe Nadjovski, Paris deputy mayor in charge of transport and public space, told France Info Radio on Tuesday. “We can’t wait. This is about planning for the long term with a strategy that will reduce greenhouse gases. Transport is one of the main greenhouse gas producers…so we are planning an exit from combustion engine vehicles, or fossil-energy vehicles, by 2030.

The mayor’s office released a statement after initial reports incorrectly labeled the new plan as a ban on conventional cars. “No measure of prohibition or sanction is included,” it said. “In order to achieve the goal of an end to the thermal engines in 2030, the City has decided to invest in the development of alternatives and in the reinforcement of financial aids that allow individuals and professionals to buy clean vehicles.” The proposed climate plan will be submitted to the Council of Paris for approval next month.

Most Paris residents do not own private automobiles. Instead, the rely on a comprehensive system of public transportation, bike sharing programs, car sharing and taxis. The city’s plan is focused on convincing residents to rethink their commitment to getting around the city by car and adopt a lifestyle that contributes much less atmospheric pollution to their daily lives.

Featured Motorcycle Posts

Advertisement

The content produced by this site is for entertainment purposes only. Opinions and comments published on this site may not be sanctioned by, and do not necessarily represent the views of Sustainable Enterprises Media, Inc., its owners, sponsors, affiliates, or subsidiaries.

The content produced by this site is for entertainment purposes only. Opinions and comments published on this site may not be sanctioned by, and do not necessarily represent the views of Sustainable Enterprises Media, Inc., its owners, sponsors, affiliates, or subsidiaries.